Comparison of the Education Approaches of Ziya Gokalp and Satı Bey

Abstract

The Second Constitutional Era can be defined as a period of crisis and depression in which a solution was sought for the unstoppable collapse of the Ottoman State. Many thinkers of the period thought that the shortest way out of this crisis was education. Ziya Gokalp and Sat & imath; Bey are also among the important thinkers who believed that the Ottoman society would get out of its current crisis through education. Ziya Gokalp, the ideologist of the & Idot;ttihad ve Terakki Cemiyeti (& Idot;TC) and Turkism, and Sat & imath; Bey, the author of the first pedagogy book of the Ottoman modernization era and the director of the D & acirc;rulmuallimin, draw attention with the ideas they put forward, their views on education, their performative aspects and their "educator-thinker" qualities. For this reason, these two names were chosen as the subject of the research in order to understand the educational problems of the period and shed light on the present day. The aim of the study was determined as "Comparison of the Education Perceptions of Ziya Gokalp and Sat & imath; Bey as Ottoman Thinkers". In line with this purpose, the questions "What are the educational views of the two thinkers? What is the intellectual background of these views? What are their ideals of humanity and society?" were sought. The study was planned as a qualitative research, data was collected from documents by applying a case study design. The obtained data was coded, classified and tried to be interpreted under common headings. The educational views of the two thinkers were limited to the books and articles they wrote during the Ottoman period. According to the findings obtained from the research, it can be said that there were different reasons and philosophical thoughts behind the solution suggestions of Gokalp and Sat & imath; Bey. They believe in "social evolution" and think that there are deterministic laws in the social sphere, just as in nature. For this reason, both of them see education as the driving force of social progress and a functional tool that will save a disintegrating society and a collapsing state. The understanding of the nation of the two thinkers is different. While Gokalp establishes the nation on the basis of "unity of language and culture", Sat! Bey establishes it on the basis of "unity of history and state". For this reason, the society that Sat! Bey calls "Ottoman nation" is called by Gokalp as "Ottoman community of nations". While Ziya Gokalp gives the duty of transferring "culture" to education within the framework of the concept of "national education", Sat! Bey thinks that education is responsible for maximizing the abilities of the individual with the claim of "pedagogical education". In terms of reform, while Ziya G & ouml;kalp defends the elitist "T & ucirc;b & acirc; Tree Theory", Sat! Bey defends the "Natural Tree Theory" that envisions social and widespread education. Both thinkers seem to agree on the implementation of new teaching methods and the fight against rote learning. However, Sat! Bey discusses new teaching methods (experiment, observation, question-answer methods, discovery and inductive strategies) in more detail. Although both educators are in favor of religious and moral education; Ziya Gokalp places the heart and emotions at the center of religious and moral education; Sat! Bey places the conscience, which he identifies with reason, at the center of religious and moral education. Therefore, when their views in the field of education are examined, it can be said that Ziya Gokalp adopts an idealist understanding of education, while Sat! Bey adopts a realistic understanding of education. Gokalp and Sat! Bey agree on the problem of integrity in the curriculum. This lack of integrity can be interpreted as a sign that they saw the lack of an "educational philosophy" that organizes and brings together education. Gokalp's suggestion here is important. It can be said that he proposed a philosophy based on the synthesis of "Turkification, Islamization and Modernization" for the Ottoman education system, where "science, culture and religion" coexist harmoniously and value the spiritual side of man. In conclusion, it is seen that many issues that were seen and discussed as problems in the field of education during the Second Constitutional Era were also problems of republican education and have not yet been solved. Therefore, the historical process should be taken into consideration in the solution of these problems, the roots of which date back two centuries in the field of education.